To think it's a bit harsh to say people who've never worked shouldn't get benefits?

[DonaldBiden]

Was reading another thread where many were saying if someone has never worked they shouldn't get any benefits but couldn't comment because it had reached 1000 comments.

I know this might be an unpopular opinion but I don't agree because that would include young mums who can't work because they have a baby to look after. Most of them will get a job when their child is a little older. Why are they any different from older mums who've fallen on hard times and need help?

And I know people will say it's because they've never worked and haven't proven themselves unlazy etc and could be on the dole forever but why should they have their lives ruined just because of something people think MIGHT happen.

My tiny niece was 3 months old when my sister found a babysitter and went back to work.
It was brutal but there were bills to pay.

I agree, I don’t think society wins by punishing two children - the kid who had the baby, and his/her baby.

I will say though that I was working before 16, as were most of my friends who went to uni and developed careers before having children. It’s how we funded that. I was surprised you felt 16 was too young to have been working already. The laws must be different in the UK.

I also didn’t like the ‘some ppl can’t bring themselves to have a termination’ tbh many of those ppl in this situation can bring themselves to risk condemning their child to a lifetime of poverty so I don’t think they have the moral high ground here.

This would be a very minute sample of the ones who have never worked but claims all the benefits though.
If it was the case that you had to work to get to recieve benefits if you hit hard times, I think many would make very different life choices.
Those who do work and prioritise earning their lifestyle mostly make that choice over how many children they can afford. Those who never worked a day in their lives can have as many as they wish as they know the bill will be picked up by others.
It depends on the area you have been brought up in or live near whether you see what this truly looks like. I was from a council house background. My parents still live there. I see it all the time. Women having kids every couple of years to make sure the benefits gravy train don't end. Knew before adulthood they had no intention of working. Spending benefits money on weed, hair, nails that could rival the working woman's level of maintenance. The 'much needed' girls abroad holiday. Can't afford to take the kids but will spend the kids money for one self (they ain't getting the money from anywhere else) then claiming poverty that the government don't provide enough.
If you see those types day to day it can really role you up

In the UK you need to be at least 16 for 99% of jobs

Exactly this.

Im talking about young mums needing some help while their babies young not older people with massive brood of kids, unless you think all young mums go on to have ten kids. Which obviously barely any do.

You know theres been a benefit cap on two children for almost ten years now? So all these people you know there gravy train must be drying up quickly

What if their bf dumped them? Theoretically child support system should pay...

I would rather live in a society that helps people than not so I don’t think benefits should require contributions.

i still don’t think the current system is ideal. Especially in the case of a young woman with a baby. No matter how generous the benefits, having no career history makes her and the baby vulnerable.

the benefits should be there, but there should also be programs to quickly transition people who are capable onto education, training, and work. A young woman with a baby shouldn’t spend multiple years at home. I’m not even convinced she should have a full year of uninterrupted maternity leave. Her education needs to be a priority.

Yes it is harsh. I was a teen mum, and for 3yrs I got benefits whilst I raised my son and went to college. I then got a student grant and loan, and have been working and paying tax for 25yrs now. Now a higher rate tax payer.

I went to school with a girl who got pregnant at 17. She's now 40 and has never had a job. She's got 4 kids but 3 dad's and constantly moans on Facebook that her council house isn't big enough. Meanwhile I have worked since I was 16, earn a good wage but made the decision to only have 1 child - as he has additional needs and we have factored in the cost of private school and potential additional cost of 1 to 1 school support - we cannot afford to have a second.

Meanwhile the girl I went to school with just expects the taxpayer to pay for her kids and lifestyle. She has never had any motivation to get a job because life is too easy on benefits.

But those older women will probably have had jobs and paid taxes etc.

Ditto!

Genuine question op. Can you explain why you think other people should pay for your choices?

Ffs! It’s also the choice of a 16 year old to get pregnant! I’m a middle earners and royally pissed off with the benefits culture we have in the UK! Something needs to change we already pay for 30 hrs a week childcare, children are a choice and if you can’t support your family you don’t keep having g children by multiple fathers. Perhaps the time has come for those on benefits to earn their benefits, this way they are getting skills that may make them employable!

How many choices do you really think are open to a pregnant 16 year old with no family support? It’s not easy to relinquish a baby to adoption, for good reason. It’s also costly option for the state and has a life long impact for the mother and the child, which also ends up costing the state. Better to support mum in her parenting of her child.

That would be great if it was within an individual's power to just work, or more accurately, get a job. A big sticking point is needing an employer to take you on.

There are so many adults with conditions and disabilities that are essentially unemployable (like my autistic DS), but who do not qualify for enhanced disability benefits.

DS has only had 1 temporary dwp funded job in 6 years of job applications.

He has a degree and he does 'work' writing articles, he even has a 'boss', but he is not paid, no one on the publication is.

When friends ask about DS, they always have an example of 'X's child' who is just the same, or a siblings that has never worked...

DS is currently in counselling/coaching to hopefully turn things around.

I actually think a universal basic income could empower more people into work.

You are speaking from a privileged position to say that only people who have worked (been employed) should get benefits. It is quite hateful really.

That’s what friends and relatives are for, not the state. It’s thinking the way you do that has sent the benefits bill soaring. Why should baby = cash handout?

I think we need more support in place to help people back into work who have been out of work for a long time or who have never worked. The bigger the gaps in your CV the harder it is to get employment and often the lower your self esteem is.

I was out of work because of DS needs for 8 years. A head teacher took the chance on me and gave me a welfare job for an hour a day. Not much but it was a foot in. 4 years down the line I am working full time at that school and completing a relevant qualification. That wouldn’t have happened if that initial risk hadn’t been taken.

For those who can work but don’t (no caring needs, no disability etc) then instead of them just being told “get a job” we should have some sort of compulsory volunteering to go alongside their benefits to help build that self esteem and get them into the habit of being up and out and working.

saying “just get a job” isn’t the answer but we do need to work to get people who can work into work.

I've had a job since my child was nursery age. I'm just saying the help is there for those who need it . Why shouldn't youngers mums receive the same help as older mums just because someone online "knows a person who has a child young and went on to never get a job"

I think we should have a ‘universal income’ and benefits be something separate.
Child benefit for example should be part of a universal income.
its ridiculous to see these as ‘benefits’ in the sense that we do - people ‘sponging’ - because these are functions beneficial for our society and a completely normal part of people’s lives. Someone coming out of prison who is on unemployment benefits, and someone receiving child benefit, for example; are not the same thing!

I think it would be helpful to have some kind of universal income which covers things like like child benefit, tax credits. And then benefits which act as a genuine safety net for unemployed, homelessness etc.

Many employed people are not net contributors anyway.

You would have to believe that we live in a meritocracy for the premise to make sense.

Many striving employees, barely breaking even, cling on to this idea that they can somehow be an Elon Musk, because those wealthy people always play down the expensive education, the vast generational wealth, because they got where they are by 'working hard'.

Very wealthy people do not pay their fair share, trickle down economics is a myth, a large minority of the population have health conditions, learning disabilities, neurodiversity...

I wish everyone would stop buying into this BS and realise that their own lives can change in an instant. Have a bit more compassion.

I’m glad people on this thread weren’t in charge of making decisions about who gets benefits when I was younger or I’d have been screwed!

I got pregnant at 19 whilst at uni despite being on birth control and didn’t find out until I was several months. I received benefits until my DD was 1 (back in those days it was maternity benefit then (I think) incapacity benefit followed by JSA and some housing and council tax benefit. I am now a high earner and so proud to live in a country that lifted me up when I needed it. Whilst I felt scared at times about my future and definitely made life harder for myself, I didn’t ever have to worry about whether we were going to live or die as I would in other countries. I still love paying my taxes that go towards supporting this for other people when they need it.

Bad example.

The whole point of benefits for single mothers is so that the children don't suffer the extreme effects of destitution, aren't left to starve or left unsupervised while the parent works a 14 hour shift at a warehouse to make ends meets.

Better would be to campaign for absent parents to contribute financially, for flexible working conditions, and for rent and childcare to be affordable for all. Then single parents could work.

The only people who should be restricted from benefits in my opinion are those who are healthy and able bodied and who are free from caring responsibilities. I believe that its quite difficult to claim much in these circumstances already.

Many employed people are not net contributors anyway.

That doesn't means it's ok to not work. Value isn't just financial.

I find it really disturbing that so many people would rather we have a huge rise in homelessness, in children who are starving or older people out on the streets. What kind of world do you want to live in? I work with the people on long term benefits, sometimes financially they have more money than me. But their lives are always poorer - many have experienced sexual abuse, physical abuse, children raised by drug and alcohol addicted parents. Often people who never work are trapped in generational cycles of abuse. Simply not giving them the money isn’t going to magically heal them from these traumas. They will just end up in a ditch. I really don’t want to live in a society where that happens.